Wednesday, November 5, 2008
posted by Tremper Longman at 1:43 PM
Over the past couple years, the NLT Bible Translation Team has labored for hours and hours refining the footnotes at the bottom of the page of the translation. I have to admit that every once in a while I have thought to myself: “Why bother? No one reads them anyway!” I really doubt a large percentage of readers do read them, but perhaps one problem is that people really don’t know why they are there or how to understand them.
There are a number of different types of footnotes and I would like to explain a some of them with the hope that people will pay more attention to them as they read and study the Bible closely.
A translation involves interpretation. Indeed, I like to tell my students that a translation is a commentary without explanations why the translators made the decisions that they make. Most modern translations (the best and most reliable ones) are a team effort by a group of biblical scholars who serve as checks and balances on our own individual scholarly idiosyncratic ideas. Thus, when a controversial or difficult passage comes down to a final vote on occasion it is a split vote. The translation that makes it into the body of the text won a majority of votes (say 8) while the one that lost got one or two less votes. On these occasions a footnote is added. Granted the difference is not so great as to change the fundamental message of the passage, but the fact that a sizeable group of scholars went with another translation means that readers ought to be aware of it and the really serious student can follow up the debate in a good commentary.
Example: In 2 Kings 2:21 Elisha announces that the bad water will become good by saying “It will no longer cause death or infertility.” The footnote informs the reader that the Hebrew could be rendered “It will not longer cause death or make the land unproductive” as well as say that the Hebrew reads “…cause death or barrenness.” This indicates that the scholars split over whether barrenness refers to people or to the land.
Probably the largest number of footnotes, though, have to do with variant texts. Usually the footnotes indicate where the translators have departed from the main text which they are translating (in the OT, the Massoretic Text in particular the Codex Leningradensis as it is found in the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia). Even though this text is considered vary reliable, it is not infallible and again on occasion scholars will opt to go with a variant text (say in the Greek Version). Again, attentive readers should be aware of this when it happens.
Example: In 1 Samuel 13:1 there is a definite problem. The Hebrew says Saul was one year old when he became king, and he reigned for two years. However, we rendered the verse to indicate that he was thirty years old when he became king and reigned for forty-two years. The footnote indicates how we come to these numbers. (Hebrew reigned . . . and two; the number is incomplete in the Hebrew. Compare Acts 13:21.)
In the NLT we also added footnotes which give a more exact rendition of the Hebrew. We do this when we offer an easier to understand translation in the text.
Example: In Leviticus 5:11 we render the Hebrew for the quantity of choice flour to be brought for the sin offering as “two quarts.” The footnote gives the measurement in the Hebrew unit as 1/10 of an ephah, with the added bonus of a metric equivalent (2.2. liters).
Besides showing measurements in both modern and ancient equivalents, the footnotes of the NLT do the same for dates.
Example: 2 Kings 25:3 is translated: “By July 18 in the eleventh year of Zedekiah’s reign…” The footnote informs the reader that the Hebrew says “By the ninth day of the [fourth] month [in the eleventh year of Zedekiah’s reign]” as well as saying that this is July 18 586 BC. The translation in the body and the footnote combine to give the ancient date and its modern equivalent.
These are some of main things we learn in the footnotes. Readers are well advised to keep an eye on them when doing close study of the biblical text.
There are a number of different types of footnotes and I would like to explain a some of them with the hope that people will pay more attention to them as they read and study the Bible closely.
A translation involves interpretation. Indeed, I like to tell my students that a translation is a commentary without explanations why the translators made the decisions that they make. Most modern translations (the best and most reliable ones) are a team effort by a group of biblical scholars who serve as checks and balances on our own individual scholarly idiosyncratic ideas. Thus, when a controversial or difficult passage comes down to a final vote on occasion it is a split vote. The translation that makes it into the body of the text won a majority of votes (say 8) while the one that lost got one or two less votes. On these occasions a footnote is added. Granted the difference is not so great as to change the fundamental message of the passage, but the fact that a sizeable group of scholars went with another translation means that readers ought to be aware of it and the really serious student can follow up the debate in a good commentary.
Example: In 2 Kings 2:21 Elisha announces that the bad water will become good by saying “It will no longer cause death or infertility.” The footnote informs the reader that the Hebrew could be rendered “It will not longer cause death or make the land unproductive” as well as say that the Hebrew reads “…cause death or barrenness.” This indicates that the scholars split over whether barrenness refers to people or to the land.
Probably the largest number of footnotes, though, have to do with variant texts. Usually the footnotes indicate where the translators have departed from the main text which they are translating (in the OT, the Massoretic Text in particular the Codex Leningradensis as it is found in the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia). Even though this text is considered vary reliable, it is not infallible and again on occasion scholars will opt to go with a variant text (say in the Greek Version). Again, attentive readers should be aware of this when it happens.
Example: In 1 Samuel 13:1 there is a definite problem. The Hebrew says Saul was one year old when he became king, and he reigned for two years. However, we rendered the verse to indicate that he was thirty years old when he became king and reigned for forty-two years. The footnote indicates how we come to these numbers. (Hebrew reigned . . . and two; the number is incomplete in the Hebrew. Compare Acts 13:21.)
In the NLT we also added footnotes which give a more exact rendition of the Hebrew. We do this when we offer an easier to understand translation in the text.
Example: In Leviticus 5:11 we render the Hebrew for the quantity of choice flour to be brought for the sin offering as “two quarts.” The footnote gives the measurement in the Hebrew unit as 1/10 of an ephah, with the added bonus of a metric equivalent (2.2. liters).
Besides showing measurements in both modern and ancient equivalents, the footnotes of the NLT do the same for dates.
Example: 2 Kings 25:3 is translated: “By July 18 in the eleventh year of Zedekiah’s reign…” The footnote informs the reader that the Hebrew says “By the ninth day of the [fourth] month [in the eleventh year of Zedekiah’s reign]” as well as saying that this is July 18 586 BC. The translation in the body and the footnote combine to give the ancient date and its modern equivalent.
These are some of main things we learn in the footnotes. Readers are well advised to keep an eye on them when doing close study of the biblical text.
Labels: Tremper Longman
Thanks for the article, I never knew that was how you decided which verse to put a footnote for. Something I did notice, for the first example, do you not mean 2 Kings 2:21 instead of 2 Kings 3:21.
Thanks Nathanael, you're right. We'll fix that.
“Why bother? No one reads them anyway!"
I'm one of the rare persons who always reads the footnotes. That's why I hope that in future editions of the NLT Study Bible, some kind of distinction will be made between the translator's footnotes and the commentary included in the study Bible itself.
I would agree with Rick. Footnotes are invaluable especially translator's footnotes. It seems to me that it makes the translation more honest to expose alternatives rather than ignore them. Thanks for the great article.
In response to Rick's comment about distinguishing between text notes and commentary notes: Early in the process of creating the NLT Study Bible we had to decide whether to (1) maintain the NLT's text-related footnotes as a separate component on the page or (2) merge them with the larger set of study notes at the bottom of each page. We opted for the latter to simplify the page design. We also find it frustrating in other study Bibles when the study notes want to address an issue that is already alluded to in the text notes, and the study note then says, "See the text note." (An example in the NIV Study Bible is the study note at Mark 9:44, 46.) This is one of those situations in life where there is no best solution!
I understand the dilemma, but for me, the translators' notes are more authoritative than the other notes, as good as the latter may be at times. Thus I prefer to see them designated somehow. Perhaps this can be done with a slightly different typeface or even a short abbreviation such as tn for "translators' note."
I'm going to vote with Rick as well. To be able to quickly identify the translator's notes versus the commentator's notes should be a valued attribute of a good study bible. I am appreciating the work put in on this one though.
I usually read footnotes and appreciate the clarity in the NET translation footnotes: many Bible versions have a vague "other authorities render..." whereas the NET will tell you which versions are being referred to.
But, I also appreciate the IBS "The Books of the Bible" presentation of the TNIV, which changes the notes into endnotes and lets me read the text without constantly referring to the bottom of the page.
The difficulty of finding the endnotes quickly allowed me to read that version through uninterrupted, which was an enjoyable experience.
But when I read through my 2nd edition NLT, I appreciated the footnotes and look forward to reading them when I later read through the NLT Study Bible.
Hey, Rick, We're planning to see if we can address the issue via typeface adjustments, which might or might not work.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home